Good for this Mom ...yes, an un provoked attack on a sex offender, and while that is a little over the top ...I say good for her. Isn't it amazing that criminally harmless gays are aware enough to find "gay friendly" communities and thus self segregate themselves ...but these sex offenders drop in where ever they want and bring fear to the life of families and young kids around them. Oprah needs to interview this woman and comp her 1M ...for her "statement" on behalf of society and our children ...generally I can't stand Oprah ...but she owes us (another 18 mths of this economy and she'll wish she didn't push Obama) and this would be a good start for her to redeem herself.
Cause and affect.
If the attack was unprovoked then she should be jailed. Our system is not based around vigilantism and an attack on any civilian who is not posing an immediate threat and who is legally free is a crime. You can’t just go around attacking people who have served a sentence no matter what the crime. Now if he had tried to touch the child...
If she applied for an NEA grant for performance art, she might’ve made some money off this
This type of thing proves that violent sex offenders should never be released from prison, ever.
She deserves a medal. Wish there were more Moms out there like her, versus the idiots that pretty much turn their children OVER to predators.
Check the paper today. I’ll be a donut that there will be a case where the perp was ‘Mom’s New Boyfriend.’
What had this sex offender done?
Although to be honest, I can’t really sympathise with someone who attacks an ex-con who has served his sentence unprovoked. You can’t just go around doing that and not expect to go to jail....
Wash. mother gets 3 months for attacking sex felon (in a trailer park with aluminum baseball bat)
No link, no info, no nothing. And you expect intelligent discussion?
In the days of old Imperial Hawaii, the religion had many taboos, usually with a death penalty for violation. So the king set up a special reservation as a place for those with a death sentence to run, to be safe from murder-minded pagan priests.
The common sense of doing so for theoretically dangerous sex offenders makes a lot of sense for several reasons. First of all, it amounts to a “voluntary” minimum security confinement, that protects society from them, but also protects them from society. Second, they can be permanently electronically monitored,. and much more intensively than out in public.
Communications with the reservation can be restricted and monitored, and no vehicles permitted. Their employment would be to maintain and improve their situation, but otherwise they would be public charges.
Maybe I missed something.
She beat the crap out of a guy for no reason. With an aluminum baseball bat. And you are justifying that? What has America sunk to?
I’ll buy this woman another Louisville Slugger!
If a person is caught molesting a child they should be put to death, not jailed for a few months, given “counseling”, and then let loose into a neighborhood. They are predators and need put down every bit as much as a rabid animal.
That said, considering who the State tries to claim is a “sex offender” she may have hit an innocent person. I know a guy who had his soon to be ex-wife claim he molested their children. For two years he was labeled a sex offender until he finally got an appeal that threw out her bogus claims. She is now in jail for making those false criminal complaints, kidnapping, taking a protected child across State lines, etc.
I guess propaganda works. Imagine the title of the article being, “Angry and bitter woman assaults man minding his own business: PMS suspected.”
The unprovoked attack was out of line, but it doesn’t bother me as much as the fact that everyone’s otherwise cheering this mom on just because this man was labelled a ‘sex offender’ - there’s no more information, so we don’t know if he was a child molester or rapist, or just some guy who got caught peeing in public when he was drunk or who had sex with his 16-year-old girlfriend when he was 18, and that makes all the difference between a woman attacking someone who posed no threat based on incomplete information and a woman acting in defense of her children.